|
Possibly, however, they act not by choice but under stress of
their several positions and collective figures?
But if position and figure determined their action each several
one would necessarily cause identical effects with every other on
entering any given place or pattern.
And that raises the question what effect for good or bad can be
produced upon any one of them by its transit in the parallel of
this or that section of the Zodiac circle- for they are not in
the Zodiacal figure itself but considerably beneath it especially
since, whatever point they touch, they are always in the heavens.
It is absurd to think that the particular grouping under which a
star passes can modify either its character or its earthward
influences. And can we imagine it altered by its own progression
as it rises, stands at centre, declines? Exultant when at centre;
dejected or enfeebled in declension; some raging as they rise and
growing benignant as they set, while declension brings out the
best in one among them; surely this cannot be?
We must not forget that invariably every star, considered in
itself, is at centre with regard to some one given group and in
decline with regard to another and vice versa; and, very
certainly, it is not at once happy and sad, angry and kindly.
There is no reasonable escape in representing some of them as
glad in their setting, others in their rising: they would still
be grieving and glad at one and the same time.
Further, why should any distress of theirs work harm to us?
No: we cannot think of them as grieving at all or as being
cheerful upon occasions: they must be continuously serene, happy
in the good they enjoy and the Vision before them. Each lives its
own free life; each finds its Good in its own Act; and this Act
is not directed towards us.
Like the birds of augury, the living beings of the heavens,
having no lot or part with us, may serve incidentally to foreshow
the future, but they have absolutely no main function in our
regard.
|
|